Ground ZER0 in the "UNgay" Paradigm Shift!

AESTHETICS 101:

Quick Links:

Intro (reopens site)
G0Y? Eh?
No-Apology
God Hates:
I Believe
Beautiful-Hide
G0YDAR
Male|Mail
Links!
0ur Groups
Literature
Peripheral View
Support Us
It Happens
Prejudices
UNvirgins
The 'LINE':
Flame
'n Fags
Head's up Dad!
GYM-g0ys!
Make'n L
0ve
Pedastery?
Peeps 101
Terr0rists
BrokeBack
'Da 'Scene'
Aesthetics 101
Empathy is G0Y

 

 





 

But Dude, - I like women...too...

I've heard it too many times to count from other guys: "But dude, - I like women..."

Of course -this is usually said after his man-sauce is staining the bed-sheets mingled with mine; --& said as if saying it somehow undoes that fact that he just shot a stream of jizz with another guy tendering his jizz-shooter. You can't unring a bell...

Here are the "calm-your-paranoid-arse-down-facts": Virtually ALL guys have had an experience with one or more guys during their lifetime that got so intimate - that to speak of the details of the event in the locker-room would likely be a social blunder in the extreme. And the vast majority of these intimate encounters never have anything to do with either guy being b1tched nor disrespected in any way. There is no gender-bending, no arse-sex, nor any thoughts of dressing either guy in sister's undies. And ultimately, -such encounters are a totally masculine experience shared between a couple of friends who happened to really like (even love) each other. What's really a mind job is that by 18 years of age, about 33% of guys have had this experience and about 33% of those who haven't - would like to! And most of them will deny it!

See, -most guys know what makes a guy an attractive guy. Think! How does a guy know how to make himself look good unless he knows what makes guys look good? Cat's out of the bag now, eh!  And the fact is that most guys know a few select guys that they'd really enjoy hanging out with -very closely together. And the simple fact is that there are a few guys in the lives of most guys - that are such good friends and have such a high degree of trust that they are literally the kind of friend/s you'd trust to hold your nuts, etc. This is not the exception. It is the general rule.  

ATTRACTION is a huge factor, but REPULSION plays a large role too.  See, lots of people who are attracted to one gender are repulsed by the notion of being with the other in a sexual sense.  These are most often the people who believe that people are either "STRAIGHT-OR-GAY".  They cannot imagine how a person who loves gender "X" could also love gender "Y".  BUT, there are the guys who may not be heavily attracted to one gender -but not repulsed by the possibility of an intimate encounter with the right person of that gender, anyway.  These are the guys who wouldn't necessarily seek to get intimate with another guy, --but might be willing to let the other guy get intimate with them if the situation was right.  So, guys who claim to be "straight" may well be --in the fact that they are strongly attracted to women.  BUT, (and this point is hugely important): Some of those same guys are not opposed to being treated to a complimentary orgasm by a best-friend -under the right conditions (they're not repulsed by the notion of being tendered on by the same gender).  Men generally have different levels of attraction & repulsion.  These (2) dynamics usually act together to determine a guy's sexual behavior and whether he's an active aggressor or merely a willing recipient of various types of affection.   

Why is the world so confused?  Well, it comes down to basic art appreciation. We live in a world gone insane -where the message is that you can like Rock-Music -OR- Country-Music (for example) but gawd-forbid you like the "wrong" style or both. And the terror made of rumors about people who like the "wrong" style or (gulp) both -- is so extreme that people are mortified to let others know that they do indeed appreciate BOTH.  Appreciating BOTH doesn't mean you see both in the same light of appreciation. 

Of course, I'm speaking in metaphors.  The "styles" I'm actually referencing are those of the male/female body-form & the related gamut of aesthetics about each person.  The fact is that +63% of the population can appreciate B0TH styles of gender to some degree or another; --And some more than others. Like any form of art appreciation, -the response to each "exhibit" varies from a disinterested shrug to an emotional response so strong that the beholder plots ways to possess it.  Have you stashed some Country-Music in your Rock-Music Library?  +63% do! And almost nobody admits it ... which can be understood when you examine the light that has been cast over the last +30 years. 

In North America (before the 1950's) -when people used the term, "Best Friends", -there was a general undertone that the term "BEST" might describe a component of the "Friendship" that was so "BEST" that it was a PRIVATE MATTER between the "Friends".  Ward & June Cleaver feigned knowing nothing about this sort of thing.  And everybody accepted the unspoken notion because there was generally no scandalous public mindset about what went on behind closed doors between "best friends" (& people were generally less demonstrative with their affection in public anyhow).  And from diaries recovered from the 19th & early 20th centuries, we know that men who were "best-friends" often shared a single bed on occasion & spoke of their mutual affection & the magnitude of their friendships without straying into details of intimate encounters -other than hint of them in circular language.  Generally, people do not speak frankly of their intimacy's fine-points.  In Japan, the mindset about such things is called "kin-jite" & it generally means "forbidden subject".  Not talking about these things does not imply that they don't happen and it doesn't imply that there is any scandal about them. And for the same reason that people generally don't walk around in the nude, --people don't generally articulate their most personal moments.  It's simply a very private matter.    

With the advent of television in the 1950's, "do-gooders" (probably men who thought that Ward Cleaver was Christ's ambassador & model-man + other people who really feared about who might be plotting Wally's kidnapping & for what reasons) released a series of commercials onto the television landscape that painted men who enjoyed men -- as being deviants & predators. Nearly 100% of ALL women & "4th graders" instantly believed the insinuation.  5th grade boys instantly became paranoid -with denial of their dualistic feelings as puberty hit them.  And +63 of men everywhere (who didn't realize that what each felt was common to a whopping +63% of all men) suddenly became invisibly oppressed under threat of emasculation w. exposure of their various (yet completely normal) pasts w. other guys. The "church-lady", -in a last minute attempt to divert attention away from her own whoredom -played the ace she had up her garter on the 6 o'clock news. And it worked:  The connection between the "ho-mo-sek-shual" and wanting to "molest little Wally" was made, & thus began the campaign to mischaracterize what +63% of the population had been up to in discretion since men existed, (by accusing it of being on par with "plotting little Wally's demise").  In the 1950's -the vacuum of real information was filled by the TV -with a gigantic menu of Aunt Bea's apple-pie-lies & general misrepresentations about the fluidic nature of human sexuality. What had started as the murmurings of some of religion's most paranoid about what "people on the fringe might be up to", -became a misguided set of judgments on a section of society -unwarranted & undeserved.  It was a message just as insane as: "If a man asks to date your daughter, -he probably wants to anally rape her." Society scoffs at such insanity, -but rumors about what certain men did with each other became the rumor about ALL such men who enjoyed the company of men.  And society, generally unaware that +63% of the population had same-gender attractions (the survey process was uncertain at the time, & censored Kinsey anyhow), -was told that it was only a "minority" of 2-3 percent.  People are much more likely to believe a giant lie than a small one.  Hitler's minister of propaganda had exploited that fact & almost nobody seemed to see the pattern reemerge. Certainly history teaches us that most people learn nothing from it. 

In the 1960's, men who were active in the subculture that would eventually be called "GAY", generally recall that the men who were fixated on being feminine or engaging in anal-sex were a fringe minority -& were generally looked down on -even within the community of men who actively searched out male company.  That fact is of monumental importance because the subculture that defined itself in terms of the downlow was about to become redefined by a media - bent on portraying the fringe as if it represented what was "par".  Media eventually came to showcase the sexually deviant & gender-non-conforming; -- calling that particular mix: "GAY".  Drag-queens & Arse-Pounders got the spotlight & those opportunists like Jerry Falwell were there to push the lying stereotype & exploit insane-level "anti-gay" fundraising$.  And men who could have quietly shared intimacy with a male friend -contexed in masculine respect -were now generically villianized along with the Arse-Queens & child-molesters (NAMBLA's foundations were part of that same "gay" lib movement)! And it is the stigmas of those mischaracterizations that has kept men of quiet character & good consciences underground to this very day, -while pornographers & perverts push anal-penetration as if it's the "gay par" with a twisted parody on male/female moirés.   

And that is how the best aspects of M2M friendships were demonized & repackaged; -And how normal men with buddy-lov'n feelings (+63%) were coerced to feel "dirty", "sinful" & socially rejected as they were cast in the light of the 2-3% fringe; -- When the fact of the matter was that they/we are completely normal & in the unrepresented majority!   

How does this medicine taste? Truth has a strong flavor & most people either love it or hate it -but everyone notices it!

I know what some of you are thinking: "What! The media,-misrepresent something! Preposterous! Surely if it's in the papers or on TV, - it must be true!". And the handful of you who live as if that's the case can feel feel free to egress. However, for those of you who have begun to have your eyes opened, -read on.

One guy recollects: "I was a total jock & yeah, I knew I was a hottie at 13 - freak'n 13! I was also discovering that I thought some other guys were hott too, -& with my ultra-conservative background added to how people talked about "fags", -those feelings really bothered me & I hoped they'd go away. Well, at 15, my stud-bud Bryan invited my overnight while his parents were gone & we got into his dad's liquor cabinet (Bry completely set me up).  We got buzzed & then wrestling & Bry was really owning me -taking my clothes off one article at a time while making fun of my drunk-buzz'n arse as he did it.  I was majorly turned on & too drunk to care that it showed.  Once he had my sweat pants down past my shorts -my raging boner was totally exposed -having formed & crawled right out the piss-slit in my briefs.  Seeing it, Brian just said, 'Phuck bro, -you've got an awesome d1ck!', and from that moment on I was never self conscious about having a hard d1ck around Bry again.  And that was good because after that night -he couldn't leave my d1ck alone! He seemed to get-off while getting me off, -starting that night when I awoke in a drunken-fog from an erotic dream & discovered Bry giving me a class-act blow-job.  I came so freak'n hard that I swore off jack'n myself; --& Bry was glad to do the deed from that point on. Of course, wrestling him down & getting him to pop was pretty satiating too."  

Compare that account to the following: "You'd think that if you're a guy who likes guys that they'd be a ton of great stories to read -especially due to the Internet being everywhere.  Well, as it turns out, -if you're a guy who actually loves guys and respects men in general; --There are darn few good reads online. Sadly, what I've found are lots of stories that start out fine, --but when it gets to the guy finally getting another into the sack; --That's when stuff turns to shit! And I mean SHIT --quite literally.  Story after sick, fukk'n story seems to cumulate in one guy FUKKING another up the ARSE; -Playing in SHIT; --or around it; --smelling shit; licking arses. WTF!  People who write that shit are some sick mother fukkerz!  I think the parasites that live in shit must have made it to their brains & fixated them on spreading the next generation of parasites by trying to eroticize shit!  Dirty, disrespectful fukks!  If there was ever anything that formed a barrier between who I am vs. the generic "FAG", it's my good sense to stay clear of the shit-pipe & never expect a man to play the role of a khunt with his arse as the stand-in!  If their was ever any fetish more disrespectful, repulsive & contrary to common-sense --it's shit-play!  FAGGOTS (rhymes with "maggots") PLAY IN SHIT! It's a hard, brown line that my buds & I refuse to cross!  Never done it; & don't want to!  Just because I like being with a naked bro from time to time & enjoying his body, gentle intimacy & tendering his amorous rod until he shoots white melting ropes; --None of that requires that we break out the disinfection kit or need to plug our noses.  We can go at it all night and nobody will smell like an arse-accident or broken sewer line!  And generally: We won't be casually exchanging diseases (because steering clear of the shit-hole reduces the chance -like 5000% or even less!)!  To me, -a hott story is about stud-buddies who take a naked roll in the sack, -enjoy each other's masculine bod & mannerisms -until they each splooge a cumm-gusher & become even better friends from the sharing of it.  And nobody ever gets fukk'd up the arse, nor called degrading names like "bitch", "girl" or "queen".  Got masculine-respect? Arse-Fukkerz have wrecked what the term "best-friends" can really be all about by dipping it in their twisted sh1t!"

"GAY" has become a social-movement hijacked by various pervert-groups; --All attempting to redefine human sexuality & make acceptable the very practices that nature itself abhors.  Anyone who wears the "GAY"-tag simply because they like their own gender /too, should think it over & perhaps adopt a different label (ahem).  "GAY" tells everyone that same-sex attractions are a "minority condition".  BullShit!  All human life starts out with the same general body form: Female by default. This is why men have nipples (ever ponder that one?)! Several weeks after conception, testosterone causes the "male" (y-switch) coded body to masculinize - changing some physical traits (I.E: forming a penis) & rewiring the brain somewhat. This differentiation on the mental level also accounts for why boys are generally more risk-taking & more aggressive than girls.  However, understanding that FEMALE is the default body form from which the male is adapted also gives some cues as to WHY amBIsexuality is the normal male sexual perspective.  Without the effects of testosterone, the natural progression would be female development an a statistical preference for male company later in life; --That (woman'esque) is the DEFAULT brain wiring.  Testosterone in-utero changes that and the modified brain wiring becomes more "female-interested" when puberty happens (prior to which, -girls are perceived as "yucky"). However, due to the nature of the rewiring -the "default" abilities to appreciate masculine cues are seldom ever completely disabled.  And the stronger -more pronounce effects of "maleness" resulting from the androgenizing effects of testosterone are more easily recognized by all men & generally seen as desirable traits. 

This is also why men tend to gravitate & bond with "manly men", & also why men admire a well developed male body-form (& why muscle magazines have lots of pictures). Now, when that bond occurs & a man finds his "manly" friend to be caring, nurturing, compassionate & a positive effect on his emotional esteem, -whatever innate brain chemistry remains from default-fetal-wiring can (& often does) act as a gateway for openness to physical bonding -expressed in the context of respectful touch with varying sexual undertones.  This form of physical appreciation is not a substitute for appreciation of what is "female". It doesn't happen as a way to imagine that another guy is a woman. It's an aesthetic appreciation of masculinity. As such, the general context of the contact is often socially framed in more aggressive & perceptually "male" activities -such as wrestling during play.   As one guy explained: "I like a guy's developed musculature because it's powerful & impressive; -not because I have any desire to imagine his larger pecs as a female's tits nor anything like that.  Wrestling with a guy is a way to gauge his overall physical abilities while making contact in a context that is well respected.  I often hope it all leads is to a deeper & more affectionate, discrete relationship off the mat." Or as another clarified: "I know what makes masculinity attractive & I enjoy pleasuring my buddy's body with massage & more personal contact - because I enjoy making him feel good; -- Like the ultimate form of art appreciation in which the art appreciates you right back. It's the very fact that his responses are masculine that makes the experience so enjoyable. He feels the same way; -& being BI -he's able to enjoy both genders in proper context. He isn't pretending that anything about me is a 'woman'.  I'm a masculine guy & I'd be p1ssed if he was trying to picture me as a chick or my arse as a snatch. That would be unnatural & frankly: fukk'd-up!  The fact I see masculine men as beautiful is not in any way a distraction to how I see women.  Being amBIsexual only becomes confusing when people believe a lie that asserts that loving Adam somehow detracts from loving Eve.  That's preposterous!  It's possible to like BOTH Vanilla AND Chocolate without needing to pretend that one is the other; --Or needing to deny one for the sake of appearances.  Just don't ask me to shit in my vanilla & call it chocolate (like so many fags do)!"

The level of physical attraction often varies in proportion to the masculine cues thrown off by each guy in the friendship. As one guy pointed out: "I have male friends whom I have no physical attraction, -just great friends. Others I find so magnetic that I want to get physical with them as soon as the opportunity is right, & see what escalations they're open to over the long run.  And I've discovered that a lot of guys feel the same things & have the same goals. I love all my friends, but some I like to love repeatedly all night.  And by 'love', -I mean as a guy, -never as a stand in for a woman in any way shape or form. And by "Love", I mean in the context that I care about their lives, happiness, families & interests. It's not a shallow thing. The fact I can appreciate a beautiful male body simply adds a slamm'n dimension to those friendships."

And these feelings of affection between men are normalNORMAL. Say it.  The real mind job happens when guys are led to believe the lie that asserts 'that only their feelings for women are normal, but feelings for other guys are somehow bad or even "evil"'.  Trying to suppress natural affection in the guise of an exclusive skirt-chasing-mentality, - takes a massive toll on a huge number of guys -many who spend their lives in hidden shame -trying to figure out "what's wrong with them", rather than venture the thought that LOTS of the most trusted people/sources in their lives have been feeding them giant lies & regurgitated bullsh1t about M2M intimate relationships!  "My religious leaders, teachers & family members - ALL lying to me?"!  Damn right! You're not the problem. The LIES are the problem.

It's easier to like a guy who's easy on the eyes, -but most guys express the feelings that the guy's mannerism needs to be appropriate. As one comment expressed: "Even if the guy looks like Hercules, -if he swishes when he walks or talks like a fag, -I'm turned off immediately. Being a man involves projecting a masculine persona. I'm not talking about needing to wear loin-cloths while eating raw meat, either. I'm saying that guys who have personality issues that create glitches in their behavior that are effeminate, girly, whiny or perceived as obvious affronts to masculine norms --those guys are projecting what I believe to be signs of much deeper potential personality problems beneath.  Any guy who shifts into "camp" mannerism - is telling everyone around him that THAT persona is more acceptable to himself than what he is naturally like.  That's a massive warning signal about the broadcaster's self-esteem, & most guys know by instinct to set some distance.  Being turned off by campy, effeminate men is not a sign of homophobia.  It's a healthy aversion away from repulsive 'women' (some of which just happen to have d1cks)."
Another comment read: "If I noticed a guy trying to get another guy's attention by adjusting his posture or mannerism to appear more female -that just turned me off.  I find something ethically repulsive about a guy willing to put on a skirt to attract another guy.  And any guy who would find such a display somehow desirable is probably not the sort I'd want in my inner circle of friends.  It may be 'freaks simply hunting freaks' -but I find it disturbing that in the next breath many people want to label that sort of perverse behavior as representative of "male same-sex-attraction".  It isn't. It's one loser settling for another loser of the same-sex -advertising that he's willing to play the female role.  It's just 1-step away from 'Yeah, I'll screw you, but you've gotta wear this bag over your head & only after I finish this drink.'! It's not attraction. It's a negotiated settlement that mandates a denial-of-reality as one of the terms. Arse-phucking (the 'man-gina') is birthed from the same dysfunctional fukk'n mentality. Freaks."
And yet even another comment reads: "Guys doing effeminate guys are creepy. It's like a guy who doesn't have enough self-esteem to know better, -agreeing to bitch himself out to the biggest loser in town who can't get any women (so he'll settle for a guy in drag once he's had enough to drink)!  That's not the behavior of guys who love guys. It's the behavior of losers who can't get a girl -but will settle for any guy who's pretending to be a woman! Pris'n-bitch'n mentality. Yeech!  Because I totally love my buds, -I'd never bitch a Bro!"

In general, -people are shallow intellectually.  Suggesting that loving guys somehow should make me act like a woman is like saying that liking lamb chops should somehow make me act like a wolf. Do you mind if I piss on your leg (after all -it's just my orientation!)? It may sound absurd, -but this is exactly the type of message that the so-called "gay-male" community/media promotes. This is why "GAY" functions constantly have the words "INTERSEXED" & "TRANSGENDERED" included in the group's description.  And it's bullsh1t -based on a giant set of lies about 'what it means to love your own gender' -promoted by a loud mass of sexually deviant minorities & religious hypocrites.  Most men recognize that fact, & regardless of their own same-gender-attractions - avoid any association with "GAY".   They're simply not willing to embrace an emasculating lie, -a lie pushed by the media (composed of people who are generally shallow intellectually & write articles to the same type of audience).

So, to understand what's NORMAL -- you 1st need to discard the counterfeits.  In this case (to make my point), -forget everyone who wears the "GAY" label openly. They don't exist anymore -nor does anything they espouse (too much random social-noise). They were never here. Instead, imagine that society NEVER lost it's sanity, and for the last 3000+ years, -it's been generally accepted that guys are amBIsexual & hook up with guys as a natural part of their friendships without anyone being b1tched (analsex is illegal) & nobody makes any mental-leaps about loving guys having anything to do with female-mannerisms (Women have female mannerisms because they're women -- not because they like guys). What's it look like? It looks like Greece -about 3000 years ago; Where male friendships were much more close & often public; --And the only "FAGS" were guys who did the Arse-Fukk (illegal & considered a perversion -use of a man in the proxy of a woman)!  "Boy-Scouts" was an organization where guys 18-25 (median) took an interest in teen-guys on the "maturing-side" of puberty & 1-on-1 mentored them in everything a guy needs to know from fighting, to sex; -& generally forming powerfully intimate friendships that lasted a lifetime.  Due to the greater responsibility of marriage, -guys were encouraged to wait longer until, --enjoying each other's masculine wiles to facilitate normal sexual frequency & coincidently -reduce unwanted pregnancies.  Because M2M sexual intimacy (without penetration) is generally so safe, --guys who lived the Greek Model generally stayed disease-free (important in a culture with NO drugs to treat STDs/STIs)!

One writer observes: "The Greeks let the cat out of the bag: Guys generally like sexy guys!  I've lost count of the number of times I was with another guy wrestling, or being close & friendly -when the guy would get wood!  So many guys seemed to get panicky when they got wood with another guy!  It was like there was some terrible taboo to be avoided!  Of course, --there WAS an unspoken terrible "taboo".  It was a word - "GAY" slapped on any guy who might have the least bit of physical affection for another guy!  "GAY" was the worse cuss you could throw at another guy --because what was really implied was that a guy -who liked guys - might buttfukk.  And every guy knew that buttfukking was simply NOT what guys who respected guys did (and they were right about that)!  

But as it stands today, brother: If you like your own gender & people discovered it -- they will say that  you are "GAY" ... and a buttfukker by insinuation!  Even if it isn't true! So, most guys try to "play it straight" by denying the wood they got when around some of their buddies.  Those of us who had figured out how the buttfukk-rumors worked (& it was the buttfukkerz who were the actual FAGS ... not guys who could appreciate a hott-bodied-bro); -& we steered clear of FAGS, their associations & groups; --while we covertly hooked up with less-inhibited hott buddies & drank deeply from their masculine endowments without mixing in any sort of buttfukking nor genderbending disrespect!  I kept mental-notes about who got wood & panicky around handsome guys.  As the drinking age set in, --a number of those same guys discovered that a few shots would take the edge off their inhibitions.  Those I took home often got educated in addition to emptying their nuts with another guy (me) in an attitude of love & respect (usually the nutt-emptying happened 1st with the education in the morning).  Sadly, several peers who took to boozing ended up with FAGS (before a g0y could school them) -- & the fudge-packers didn't show them any real respect; -- the only lesson they learned was from a drag-queen called "MISS-EDUCATION".  MISS-EDUCATION taught them that they were "REPRESSED" & part of some "BUTT-FUKKING-MINORITY".  Now, that belief might be a good reason to drink if there was one!  Of course, we know that it's normal for guys to dig hott-guys.  It's the buttfukkerz that cause the confusion (so, steer clear of their delusion)!"

So: If you're a guy who's been beat up by others or yourself for merely liking guys; --It's time to wake the fukk up; --take a squeegee to your conscience & practice flipping the bird at those too arrogant to listen to facts.  Don't waste another minute living in false condemnation for something +63% (or more) of the male population has in common & are generally in denial about (no thanks to the fear-of-fagdom).  Whether a guy likes women has absolutely no bearing on whether he likes guys /too!  The problem has arisen because men have allowed arse-fukkerz to define what male/male relationships consist of.  That's like letting rapists define what male/female relationships consist of!  Let common-sense framed by a healthy historical precedent be your guide! If it rips out arse-holes & spreads diseases like the plague; --then it's probably just fukk'n dumb (who gives a flying fukk how many people are advertising it)!  Man up.  Accept the fact that you like vegetables AND meat.  Don't let anyone tell you that they're the same.  They're unique in form & require different treatment by their very nature!  Women are designed for penetration.  Men are NOT.  Only a fukking idiot suggests that an arse is on par with a snatch. And society is jam packed with fukking idiots & their mindless followers!  Man up.  Flip them off.  Embrace masculine compassion framed with wisdom!  "Tolerating everything" is the giant weakness of the culture calling itself "GAY"; --Because men of good consciences will NEVER embrace a philosophy that requires them to turn their gut-sense of masculine respect off.  "GAY" -by it's very nature is a term that will gain acceptance only by the same degree that society loses it's healthy-moral sensibilities.    

A tale of two tails...

When I discovered that the person (pictured from the back on the left above) was a "guy", -I'll admit that part of me wanted to slip back away quietly without being discovered by him and thus avoid the inevitable question I was sure would find it's way out of me if conversation ensued: "So, does your sister know you're wearing her girlie jeans?".  And yet, we are told by the "experts of gay fashion" that those exact same jeans are made for men. Uh-huh. Men...men who lack testicles, perhaps. When I see that image & hear the term "jeans" ... I think of another term that sounds exactly the same, -- 2 chromosomes specifically -- both shaped like "X's".
Which raises the question: Am I simply being an ass with a baseless distaste for what is called "progressive gay fashion", --or is my gut feeling to back away quickly (from the man wearing the denim girlie leggings) based on actual information about what is normal vs. what is forced & bizarre? I believe that anyone with an IQ higher than a parsnip will immediately recognize the appropriateness of the fit that the jeans in the right side of the frame have on the person wearing them.  The cut of the clothing is for a man --not because somebody in the fashion industry issues a decree, -but because they fit the actual male anatomy based on the reality of how men develop.  You see, - higher testosterone levels combined with physical activity develop leg muscles and bones in men that are bigger, stronger and shaped quite differently than that of women (who generally have wider hips & smaller musculature).  Trying to jam male anatomy into clothing clearly cut to accommodate female anatomy (left image) illustrates a designer who is disconnected from reality &/ simply fukk'd in the head (& yes - that's my official analysis).  Of course, - the "gay" community has been trying to jam men into the shape of women for a long time and some people are shallow enough to buy the lie (quite literally).  It's bad enough when the emperor has no clothes, but now he's being dressed up like the queen & we're all supposed to applaud & think it's great.  Nope.  Not buying it. Great fashion made for men is made to accommodate what testosterone does to an active, healthy, strong male body.  G0YS know this by instinct. It's simply "REALITY".  And "reality" is something that the "gay" community seems bent on disregarding.

You G0YS don't do what???

The vast majority of people who hear the term "GAY" immediately fall prey to media messages & make the mental connection with AnalSex (and gender-bending by inference).  Surveys done recently show that +75% of the "GAY-MALE COMMUNITY" admit to having AnalSex.  What was once considered the action of the fringe is now the majority "gay-male" experience (that's the power of suggestion over several decades)!  So let me show you the mental progression.

Most guys shun the notion of analsex. Most guys are also amBIsexual. Yes. Most. Because of gay-media lies, -the suggestion of men loving men has been welded to anal-fetishes.  Therefore, in the minds of most men, -their same-sex attractions represent a moral shortfall because they presume that being intimate with another man will somehow lead to to the act of AnalSex.  Because they feel that act is so repugnant, -they suppress/deny their same-gender affections under the terror of being associated with an act they find morally reprehensible (& for good reason).

Now, reveal G0YS: The guy who discovers that same-gender-affections generally do NOT lead to AnalActs has uncovered a very-large demographic of men we call "G0YS"; -- AND the majority of g0ys are amBIsexually identified (not exclusively SameSex attracted).  Suddenly: The lights between the ears turns on -often for the 1st time in a guy's life!  As soon as all notions of "transgender" & "buttfukk" are removed from the fact that guys know what makes a guy good-look'n (it's the default brain-wiring for everyone), a guy is able to intensify his best friendships & accept the notion of physical affection without the AnalSex stigmas of "GAY" stereotypes threatening the masculine integrity of the friendship/s-gone-best. 

The great irony is that the MAJORITY of men love the aesthetics of masculine beauty, -but are confused by lying mass "gay" media that distorts the natural form of such intimacy.

IF what the Greeks knew 3000 years ago was the message today (that men generally love handsome men, too, -but playing the female-role is shameful/illegal); --then "G0YS" would be the GLOBAL-DEFAULT male friendship model, and sexually transmitted diseases among men would be among the LOWEST STD RATES (as opposed to the "GAY-STD" rate that is +4300% higher than the population in general)!

Man-up: Go G0Y!